|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Sept 28, 2017 18:30:33 GMT
The problem with DC though is that they are entirely dependent on Batman and Superman. Outside of those two, except for Wonder Woman which only just came out they've no success with any one else. Even Superman has only ever been a mixed success in theatres. Marvel gave away their big properties and yet still made the MCU the phenomenon it is today which DC are struggling to replicate even with their two main characters. DC would never have made a successful Cinematic Universe without those two unlike how Marvel was able to. well, I'm not a comic or DC-fan (read the last one before hitting puberty a while ago) but that assessment of yours deems me to be pretty bad, dude - esp considering the exorbitant success of WW (a female led origin CMB beating all other origin movies) and the even more incredible success the Suicide Dreck (despite the latter's dubious quality on Hulk turd level). People just want to see fresh faces after decades of the same characters; MCU just came and delivered. Apart from this, DC is iconic since ever unlike Marvel which is a mere upstart. And let's discuss DCEU's merits after only 4 movies vis-a-vis 16+ MCU movies, shall we? (remember this comes from an innocent bystander, not a DC fan) Last but not least, MCU will never claw back the Fox-Men, and that is an unrelated yet deeply encouraging and rewarding parting thought. You have the right to accept your defeat by remaining silent ...send Colden my regards.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Sept 28, 2017 19:33:59 GMT
The DCEU has an Oscar for make up, let's not go overboard.
They've all been very successful at the box office and that's true but only one has been considered a good movie. Realistically we all know that Justice League isn't going to be a good movie and it's projected to make even less money than Batman vs Superman which is pretty bad.
DC as a whole have had a bunch of successful Batman movies, hit and miss Superman movies and aside from that a couple of hits but mainly a bunch of complete failures like Jonah Hex and Green Lantern.
Marvel made something out of their B Listers. They can afford to not have Spider-man or X-men and they'd still rake in the billions.
DC because they are so overly reliant on Batman and Superman would never be able to do the same. If they'd sold the rights to them like Marvel did with Spider-man, then they'd have nothing.
They made a successful superhero with a female character, that shouldn't be that big of a deal. At the same time they came out with complete trash like Supergirl and Catwoman which set those female superhero movies back in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Sept 28, 2017 19:39:50 GMT
The problem with DC though is that they are entirely dependent on Batman and Superman. Outside of those two, except for Wonder Woman which only just came out they've no success with any one else. Even Superman has only ever been a mixed success in theatres. Marvel gave away their big properties and yet still made the MCU the phenomenon it is today which DC are struggling to replicate even with their two main characters. DC would never have made a successful Cinematic Universe without those two unlike how Marvel was able to. well, I'm not a comic or DC-fan (read the last one before hitting puberty a while ago) but that assessment of yours deems me to be pretty bad, dude - esp considering the exorbitant success of WW (a female led origin CMB beating all other origin movies) and the even more incredible success the Suicide Dreck (despite the latter's dubious quality on Hulk turd level). People just want to see fresh faces after decades of the same characters; MCU just came and delivered. Apart from this, DC is iconic since ever unlike Marvel which is a mere upstart. And let's discuss DCEU's merits after only 4 movies vis-a-vis 16+ MCU movies, shall we? (remember this comes from an innocent bystander, not a DC fan) Last but not least, MCU will never claw back the Fox-Men, and that is an unrelated yet deeply encouraging and rewarding parting thought. You have the right to accept your defeat by remaining silent ...send Colden my regards. The MCU doesn't need X-men. They've made $12.6 billion at the box office becoming the highest grossing movie franchise ever without them. They have Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Black Panther, The Avengers, Ant-man, Spider-man, Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange and Captain Marvel. They won't lose any sleep by not having one other property.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Sept 28, 2017 19:50:27 GMT
well, I'm not a comic or DC-fan (read the last one before hitting puberty a while ago) but that assessment of yours deems me to be pretty bad, dude - esp considering the exorbitant success of WW (a female led origin CMB beating all other origin movies) and the even more incredible success the Suicide Dreck (despite the latter's dubious quality on Hulk turd level). People just want to see fresh faces after decades of the same characters; MCU just came and delivered. Apart from this, DC is iconic since ever unlike Marvel which is a mere upstart. And let's discuss DCEU's merits after only 4 movies vis-a-vis 16+ MCU movies, shall we? (remember this comes from an innocent bystander, not a DC fan) Last but not least, MCU will never claw back the Fox-Men, and that is an unrelated yet deeply encouraging and rewarding parting thought. You have the right to accept your defeat by remaining silent ...send Colden my regards. The MCU doesn't need X-men. They've made $12.6 billion at the box office becoming the highest grossing movie franchise ever without them. They have Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Black Panther, The Avengers, Ant-man, Spider-man, Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange and Captain Marvel. They won't lose any sleep by not having one other property. Is that then why they are sabotaging the X-Men IP by restricting their appearances in comics, cartoons and recently video games (Marvel v Capcom has no X-Men) whilst also forming the failed Inhumans show to mimic them. They are desperate to have them back. Ant-Man, Dr Strange, Thor etc will only last for so long.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Sept 28, 2017 20:02:53 GMT
well, I'm not a comic or DC-fan (read the last one before hitting puberty a while ago) but that assessment of yours deems me to be pretty bad, dude - esp considering the exorbitant success of WW (a female led origin CMB beating all other origin movies) and the even more incredible success the Suicide Dreck (despite the latter's dubious quality on Hulk turd level). People just want to see fresh faces after decades of the same characters; MCU just came and delivered. Apart from this, DC is iconic since ever unlike Marvel which is a mere upstart. And let's discuss DCEU's merits after only 4 movies vis-a-vis 16+ MCU movies, shall we? (remember this comes from an innocent bystander, not a DC fan) Last but not least, MCU will never claw back the Fox-Men, and that is an unrelated yet deeply encouraging and rewarding parting thought. You have the right to accept your defeat by remaining silent ...send Colden my regards. The MCU doesn't need X-men. They've made $12.6 billion at the box office becoming the highest grossing movie franchise ever without them. They have Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Black Panther, The Avengers, Ant-man, Spider-man, Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange and Captain Marvel. They won't lose any sleep by not having one other property. I did not insinuate that MCU needed the X-Men commercially, they currently do not. Rather, the X-Men need to be shielded from the greedy clutches of MCU to artistically prosper further; we would never have gotten a quality, out of the box film like Logan or even Deadpool under Disney-MCU dictatorship, it would have been all the same kiddy-friendly play-it-safe formula. Apart from that, MCU seems to have all its eggs in the cinematic basket without a varied media portfolio. When the CBM bubble bursts - and they usually burst when ppl deem it least likely - there will be much more crucial things that Marvel Studio will lose than sleep. Hence all the passive-aggressive, petty bullying towards Fox-Men.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Sept 28, 2017 20:40:17 GMT
The MCU doesn't need X-men. They've made $12.6 billion at the box office becoming the highest grossing movie franchise ever without them. They have Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Black Panther, The Avengers, Ant-man, Spider-man, Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange and Captain Marvel. They won't lose any sleep by not having one other property. Is that then why they are sabotaging the X-Men IP by restricting their appearances in comics, cartoons and recently video games (Marvel v Capcom has no X-Men) whilst also forming the failed Inhumans show to mimic them. They are desperate to have them back. Ant-Man, Dr Strange, Thor etc will only last for so long. There is no sabotage. Wolverine was just announced to be coming back to life in the comics. A Deadpool cartoon is currently in preparation production. They haven't made an X-men cartoon in years because Wolverine and the X-men was a merchandising failure and made no money. Except for Spider-man and that crappy Guardians of the Galaxy no other Marvel character has their own game. Iron Man has no game, Thor has no game, Captain America has no game. The Inhumans has nothing do with X-men nor is anything like X-men.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Sept 28, 2017 21:22:19 GMT
Exactly, it meant that instead of taking the lazy way out they had to put effort into building up their characters and making them more A-List (though in the comics, Iron Man and Cap are A-Listers). Now we have Guardians of the Galaxy beating out Superman and Batman at the Movies.enjoy the momet, the momentum will wane quicker than you might imagine. Batman and Superman were big the last century and will be so for the next while most to all of the MCU characters will have long disappeared into the phantom zone of nerd obscurity again where they came from and belong. Nope. Once they're in the consciousness significantly enough they can stay there. Plus, not being flat archetypes like Superman and Batman helps.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Sept 28, 2017 21:23:56 GMT
The MCU doesn't need X-men. They've made $12.6 billion at the box office becoming the highest grossing movie franchise ever without them. They have Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Black Panther, The Avengers, Ant-man, Spider-man, Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange and Captain Marvel. They won't lose any sleep by not having one other property. Is that then why they are sabotaging the X-Men IP by restricting their appearances in comics, cartoons and recently video games (Marvel v Capcom has no X-Men) whilst also forming the failed Inhumans show to mimic them. They are desperate to have them back. Ant-Man, Dr Strange, Thor etc will only last for so long. That's on Ike Perlmutter, not the rest of the Marvel people. And no, with proper care Ant-Man/Dr Strange and Thor will last that long.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Sept 28, 2017 21:25:07 GMT
The MCU doesn't need X-men. They've made $12.6 billion at the box office becoming the highest grossing movie franchise ever without them. They have Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Black Panther, The Avengers, Ant-man, Spider-man, Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange and Captain Marvel. They won't lose any sleep by not having one other property. I did not insinuate that MCU needed the X-Men commercially, they currently do not. Rather, the X-Men need to be shielded from the greedy clutches of MCU to artistically prosper further; we would never have gotten a quality, out of the box film like Logan or even Deadpool under Disney-MCU dictatorship, it would have been all the same kiddy-friendly play-it-safe formula. Apart from that, MCU seems to have all its eggs in the cinematic basket without a varied media portfolio. When the CBM bubble bursts - and they usually burst when ppl deem it least likely - there will be much more crucial things that Marvel Studio will lose than sleep. Hence all the passive-aggressive, petty bullying towards Fox-Men. Deadpool wasn't that good, it's mainly just an MCU movie with sex and gore. Logan got the reception it did because of the artificial boost from being Jackman's Swan Song. Plus, the FoX-Men fans are the ones who started this "conflict" to begin with. Not MCU's fault they can't own up.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 29, 2017 3:14:32 GMT
If they'd sold the rights to them like Marvel did with Spider-man, then they'd have nothing. DC wouldn't be as dumb as Marvel to sell the movies rights to their flagship characters. They made a successful superhero with a female character, that shouldn't be that big of a deal. Well, it is a pretty big deal considering that MCU still hasn't made a superhero movie with a female lead after 9 years and 17 movies. And MCU is only making Captain Marvel as a reaction to WB announcing a Wonder Woman movie first.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Sept 29, 2017 5:34:35 GMT
If the DCEU was a true Shared Universe, they wouldn't have taken the lazy way out by starting off with the predictable ones like Batman and Superman. It isn't lazy to start off with your biggest hitters. It's smart strategy.
MCU fans complain about it only because MCU doesn't have any big hitters like Superman and Batman. It would be like fans of other teams complaining about the 1990s Bulls because Michael Jordan takes the most shots on the team and whenever a game comes down to the last shot, Michael Jordan is usually the 1 who takes that last shot for the Bulls.
"Waah! Waah! Waah! Why is Jordan always taking that last shot for the Bulls? Why doesn't someone else take that last shot for the Bulls? Waah! Waah! Waah!"
Because when you have the greatest player in the world on your team, it's smart strategy to have him take the last shot when the game's on the line. And when you have Superman and Batman, it's smart strategy to start your shared cinematic universe with them. It's not DC's fault that MCU is so lame that MCU doesn't have any big hitters like Superman and Batman.
So you're comparing MJ to Batman and Superman? Ok, if that's the case, why aren't they winning? MJ was clutch, and always made the winning basket. Both Superman and Batman tried to take the last shot and lost. They got beaten by Civil War financially and critically last year. And we all know MJ went undefeated in the NBA Finals.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Sept 29, 2017 5:39:40 GMT
If they'd sold the rights to them like Marvel did with Spider-man, then they'd have nothing. DC wouldn't be as dumb as Marvel to sell the movies rights to their flagship characters. You do realize that Marvel was on the verge to bankruptcy, and they had to sell the rights to their respective characters to film studios.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Sept 29, 2017 7:15:36 GMT
If they'd sold the rights to them like Marvel did with Spider-man, then they'd have nothing. DC wouldn't be as dumb as Marvel to sell the movies rights to their flagship characters. They made a successful superhero with a female character, that shouldn't be that big of a deal. Well, it is a pretty big deal considering that MCU still hasn't made a superhero movie with a female lead after 9 years and 17 movies. And MCU is only making Captain Marvel as a reaction to WB announcing a Wonder Woman movie first. Marvel didn't really much of a choice. They either had to sell them or they'd have become bankrupt. I don't see what's such a big deal about having a superhero movie with a female lead. It's not like there's a whole lot of big name female superheroes that warrant a lead role in a movie in the first place. Aside from Captain Marvel what else are people demanding? A She-Hulk movie? They don't even give Hulk a movie. Spider-Woman? They only just got Spider-man. They made Jessica Jones which was a female led TV series. Marvel had the Elektra movie and it was one of the least successful Marvel movies of the lot. Same with Catwoman which was made at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Sept 29, 2017 10:12:14 GMT
Damn Java error at work...ignore this post
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Sept 29, 2017 10:49:54 GMT
If they'd sold the rights to them like Marvel did with Spider-man, then they'd have nothing. DC wouldn't be as dumb as Marvel to sell the movies rights to their flagship characters. They made a successful superhero with a female character, that shouldn't be that big of a deal. Well, it is a pretty big deal considering that MCU still hasn't made a superhero movie with a female lead after 9 years and 17 movies. And MCU is only making Captain Marvel as a reaction to WB announcing a Wonder Woman movie first. DC sold their ENTIRE company to WB. And no, it's not a big deal because MCU did more with lesser known female characters before DC made Wonder Woman. The only reason they didn't do movies before was because of Ike Perlmutter and he's out of the way now.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Sept 29, 2017 12:44:29 GMT
Oh my poor little repetitive little friend...you have been owned so many times regarding these points Iron Man: "I know that Bucky and Cap are going to show up a the airport to hijack the quinjet to make their escape Nope, despite your insistence in the past...that never happened. Admit it you don't watch these films From the guy that came up with a self piloting, invisible, high speed Magic Boat to excuse some poor writing in Wonder Woman
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Sept 29, 2017 12:56:43 GMT
Well, it is a pretty big deal considering that MCU still hasn't made a superhero movie with a female lead after 9 years and 17 movies. And MCU is only making Captain Marvel as a reaction to WB announcing a Wonder Woman movie first. Marvel have had input into their films since 1998..it took them 7 years to make their first female fronted CBM film (Elektra) DC have had input into their films since 1989...it took them 15 years to make their first female fronted CBM film (Catwoman). It took them 28 YEARS to give a leading role to one of the most well known and recogniseable, regardless of gender, comic book characters in history. There are arguments that can be made for both sides on what they have and have not done for female CBM movies. And stop pretending you care...you have shown in the past the low opinion you sometimes have for women and their abilities
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Sept 29, 2017 13:03:11 GMT
Well, it is a pretty big deal considering that MCU still hasn't made a superhero movie with a female lead after 9 years and 17 movies. And MCU is only making Captain Marvel as a reaction to WB announcing a Wonder Woman movie first. Marvel have had input into their films since 1998..it took them 7 years to make their first female fronted CBM film (Elektra) DC have had input into their films since 1989...it took them 15 years to make their first female fronted CBM film (Catwoman). It took them 28 YEARS to give a leading role to one of the most well known and recogniseable, regardless of gender, comic book characters in history. There are arguments that can be made for both sides on what they have and have not done for female CBM movies. And stop pretending you care...you have shown in the past the low opinion you sometimes have for women and their abilities Why? What did he say?
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Sept 29, 2017 13:20:33 GMT
Marvel have had input into their films since 1998..it took them 7 years to make their first female fronted CBM film (Elektra) DC have had input into their films since 1989...it took them 15 years to make their first female fronted CBM film (Catwoman). It took them 28 YEARS to give a leading role to one of the most well known and recogniseable, regardless of gender, comic book characters in history. There are arguments that can be made for both sides on what they have and have not done for female CBM movies. And stop pretending you care...you have shown in the past the low opinion you sometimes have for women and their abilities Why? What did he say? Well he believed Warner's took a risk hiring his beloved Patty Jenkins BECAUSE she was a woman (perhaps I was a bit over dramatic). He has said a ricsk hiring a female director, or a female director with only one independednt film behind her. What relevance does her sex have? Have called him up on it in the past, and as usual ignores the accusation.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Oct 1, 2017 4:54:27 GMT
I've had people try to explain to me what "counts" and what doesn't, and I apologize for not understanding even still. They're all comic-book movies based on the same company's product, no? I understand there's that "shared universe" (a concept I don't like, as I've written elsewhere recently), but I don't understand why some "count," despite not showing up with some other character (yet?), and some don't. But I am a layman in this regard, as you say, who tries to give an honest opinion. The reason is behind the "blame" thing that fans try to assign. The characters Fox and Sony have are indeed Marvel characters, but Marvel didn't get to make creative decisions about those characters with the movies until recently with Spidey and Sony. So it's hardly on Marvel when a horrible X-men or FF movie is released by Fox. Fox has mostly been a disaster with X-men and Fantastic Four. They've somehow managed to screw up these legendary characters: - Dr Doom (twice)
- Cyclops
- Storm
- Rogue
- Silver Surfer
- Dark Phoenix
- Colossus
- Deadpool (since repaired by the movie Fox didn't care about)
- Galactus
- Sue Storm
- Angel
- Kitty Pryde
- Mystique
Pretty much a train wreck with a few good/decent films sprinkled in to the mix occasionally. (Give them credit for Logan and X2) They are the only studio of the big 4 releasing SH films that failed to get a single movie above 250 million in the US. The one that broke out big was the one they didn't care about and let other people control....Deadpool. Now that Fox cares about DP...look for DP2 to have serious issues. You can see the difference when even the DC fan admits there is a difference in this very thread. No need to apologize. It's just common sense that all comic-book movies based on the same company's product should be part of the same "shared cinematic universe" and not spread out among 3 different "cinematic universes". I've said many times before (and have been viciously attacked by MCU fans for saying this) that MCU doesn't even have all of the comic-book movies based on Marvel's own product (Marvel comics), then it's not really a "shared cinematic universe". At best, it's only a sub-universe since their characters are just a subset of Marvel's products (Marvel comics).
It's like a coin collection or a stamp collection of the 50 states or of all the US Presidents. If your collection is missing 2 states or 2 Presidents, then you're collection is incomplete and isn't worth as much as a collection that contains all 50 states or all US Presidents.
That's why MCU fans want DECU and Fantastic Four and X-Men movies to fail. Because DCEU is an true "shared cinematic universe" and because the Fantastic Four and the X-Men are preventing MCU from having a true "shared cinematic universe".
As you can see he knows very well there is a big difference in a Marvel studio movie and movies produced by Fox. They aren't the same category at all. There is no way Marvel would have done a "Wolverine and Friends" series of X-movies that almost totally ignore legendary characters like Cyclops and Storm. So by all means list all the lame Fox movies...they've earned that type of mocking for many years.
|
|